Posted on 12/01/2009 7:32:35 PM PST by Kaslin
They weren't indicative nationally and represented no more than local issues playing out locally, right? Wrong. They represented a conservative groundswell ideologically and personally.
The table below shows the four races. The first two columns indicate the percentages of the vote total gained by each party in the 2008 presidential election and the 2009 state and congressional elections. The third column shows the difference between the two elections, while the fourth totals the differences from the 2008 Democratic baseline.
The difference is dramatic in three of the races including the special election in California's 10th congressional district where the Democrat won by double digits. Even factoring in the NY-23 special election, where the official Republican candidate finished third, all four races show an improvement for conservatives.
Assuming Republicans are the more conservative alternative, a Gallup Poll taken Nov. 5-8 gave a national scope to the November sample. Its survey of 2010 generic congressional preferences produced a 46% to 44% lead for Republicans (48% to 44% among registered voters reversing a 6% Democratic lead in July).
So how do we explain the conservative surge? Exit polling in the New Jersey and Virginia races provided a detailed voter breakdown.
In New Jersey, the breakdown by gender and race showed little change. The Democratic advantage in voter participation fell three percentage points (to 41%), while the Republicans gained the same amount (to 31%). By ideology, liberals remained at 25%, while moderates fell to 45% from 50% and conservatives climbed to 30% from 25%.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
To get the economy going, they WILL have to cut taxes, and cut spending. I guess this is right.
No way Democrats will do that.
The only way to stimulate economic growth is to cut taxes and cut spending basic econ 101. Works ever time it is tried.
I know you don’t mean, but please clarify
Voters are finally starting to recollect ...that economic misery commenced under the start of the Democratic Congress elected in 2006( when..according to the bright lights in the MSM..we had the “worst economy ever since the Great Depression”).....
That was supposed to be I know you don’t mean me
I have always been a big admirer of IBD editorials. Feel free to put me on the ping list
Yep. They were in charge of spending, and it all went down hill from there.
Look at the post history. Dubious at best.
Ask a liberal when the liberals took charge. 80% will get it wrong.
"Assuming" is the key word here. If the Republicans were to go back to their conservative roots, we could take Washington in a landslide. It's Regan 101.
I’d want an explanation of that remark too, if I were you. Kinda came outta nowhere (I think).
I think Party affiliation is past it. People want change, Conservative change, and I think will vote for whoever is the Conservative person regardless of Party.
Seems to be moving around. To attack without clarification over and over seems to be on purpose.
Hmmm. I’ve been wondering if our Republican “leaders” have been so weak in their efforts to stop the Democrats because they are hoping all the things the socialists are doing will wake America up and cause them to vote Republican.
Of course, it is disgusting to a lot of Republicans. But our leadership takes us for granted.
What if this whole Obama debacle is the result of careful planning by Rove?
I still can’t get over the party putting McCain up as our great hope.
It’s rather cartoonish, eh? I suspect an exit stage left momentarily. Can you dig it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.